Rear extension and loft conversion at 147 North Approach, Watford

What was proposed

Retrospective permission was sought for rear extensions, a hip-to-gable loft conversion with rear dormer and a permeable driveway.

“The application seeks retrospective permission for the erection of part single, part two-storey rear extension, hip-to-gable loft conversion with rear dormer and permeable driveway.”

“The rear dormer is measured 3.706m in depth, 2.617m in height and 5.53m in width and is set 0.24m above the eaves, 0.45m below the eaves, 0.23m away from the party wall shared with the semi-detached dwelling at No. 145 and 0.26m away from the side edge of the existing gable.”

Officer report

The site and surroundings

The site is a two-storey semi-detached house formerly used as a doctors surgery, in a mainly residential area near a school and road.

“The application site comprises a two-storey semi-detached property situated on the south side of North Approach in Stanborough ward. The property was formally in use as a Doctors surgery and was converted to a house following the grant of planning permission in 2013.”

“The application property is attached to its semi-detached pair No. 145, North Approach which is located to the east. No. 145 has been extended with a ground-floor side and rear extension. No. 145 also has a front hardstanding area. Adjacent to the west is the semi-detached house of No 149 North Approach. Both of the described neighbouring properties have detached double garages located at the rear.”

Officer report

Earlier permissions and applications

Earlier permissions covered residential use, rear extensions, the loft conversion and related works, while a seven-bedroom HMO proposal was refused.

“25/00240/LDC Lawful development certificate for proposed hip to gable loft conversion including rear dormer, x 2 front roof lights and single storey rear extension and driveway GLDC 09.05.2025”

“25/00620/FUL Erection of part single, part two-storey rear extension, hip-to-gable loft conversion with rear dormer to facilitate Change of use from C3 Dwelling House to Sui Generis 7 Bed HMO including provision for car and cycle parking, external amenity spaces, and other associated works RPP 19.09.2025”

Officer report

Consultation responses

Highways raised no objection, while 11 properties submitted objections covering use, parking, noise, privacy, design, waste and other concerns.

“Statutory consultees and other organisations Highways - raised no objection to the application. Advised including informatives to address the following matters:”

“Privacy impact/overlooking It has been found that the part two-storey side and rear extension does not generate an undue privacy impact on the neighbouring occupiers as outlined in the paragraph 6.20 of the report.”

Officer report

What was said at committee

A neighbour challenged the dormer position, parking information, waste arrangements, construction and the accuracy of the retrospective application.

Members questioned the information

Members questioned whether the plans matched the building, while officers explained the permissions, enforcement position and possible effects of deferral.

“The Development Management Lead responded that officers were aware that the development had already taken place, which was the reason the application had been submitted. Officers had to go by the plans that had been provided by the applicant. They had submitted the application to remedy the breach. If the plans were different to the development they had done, they would remain in breach.”

“The Chair said that he sympathised with the sentiment. He reminded members that if they did grant the application, planning enforcement had the information on the agreed plans. It was not definite that the plans did need any modification. He would prefer not to defer the decision, but it was the committee’s decision. He asked the officers for their thoughts.”

Minutes

The decision was deferred

The committee voted to defer the application so officers could investigate the accuracy of the information and development on site.

“The Chair asked the committee to vote on deferring the application to enable officers to investigate the accuracy of the information in the application.”

“On being put to the committee, it was agreed the decision was deferred to a future meeting.”

Minutes